linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next, v1 0/3] Add Default Rx Queue Setting for igc driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240731165253.2571b254@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:52:53 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc: "Song, Yoong Siang" <yoong.siang.song@...el.com>, "Neftin, Sasha"
 <sasha.neftin@...el.com>, Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>,
 "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov
 <ast@...nel.org>, "Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "Nguyen, Anthony L"
 <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "Blanco Alcaine, Hector"
 <hector.blanco.alcaine@...el.com>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, "Gomes, Vinicius"
 <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>, "Kitszel, Przemyslaw"
 <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
 Shinas Rasheed <srasheed@...vell.com>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org"
 <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "Tian,
 Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
 Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
 <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Hay, Joshua A" <joshua.a.hay@...el.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next, v1 0/3] Add Default Rx Queue
 Setting for igc driver

On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:41:16 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote:
> In this case, (I haven't dug into the actual patches or code), I suspect
> the driver will need to validate the location values when adding rules
> to ensure that all rules which don't use the default queue have higher
> priority than the wild card rule. The request to add a filter should
> reject the rule in the case where a default queue rule was added with a
> higher priority location.

Maybe I shouldn't say it aloud but picking a "known" location for such
a wildcard rule wouldn't be the worst thing. Obviously better if the
driver just understand ordering!